 | | Re: It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
(...) Well, if we absolutely must have a mad theocrat in office, I'd certainly want the mad theocrat with God on his side. Pity that the rock of W's faith wasn't sufficient to keep him on the straight and narrow in 1992, fully 6 years after his (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) Which of course has no bias... (...) But NPR is not biased toward the US, if anything, it's biased against, and has the same information, so what IF the Economist is biased in favor of economic systems that actually work and against ones that (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
(URL) showing that article to my SO, she asked if I thought Shrub actually believed this stuff or if he was just trying to gain greater access to a particular constituency group. My answer? See subject line. -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) the most basic element of democracy is that the people decide how they want their government to work. in 1981, when US backed Saddam invaded their country, people signed up en masse to give their lives for their country. Of course, it is easy (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) Er, whoops. I'm an Economist subscriber (print edition) so it's no cost to me. But the point of the article, and the diagram in particular, is that Iran is more of a theocracy that has some elected (but basically powerless) appendages, than a (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
